[Kitechaser]

10 days isnt enough burn-in. you need 500 hours = 500/24 = 20 days and 20 hours. /s



Yea, there's a lot more to consider like decay/waterfall csd charts, harmonic distortion, clarity, etc.

- - -

Again, I havent listend to this, but just looking at the FR chart and assuming it's Raw. It has to be otherwise that IEM is seriously messed up -- then the only thing that really may bother me is the big spike in the treble around 10-15KHz. It's probably too much a spike up. It'll create a ton of air and energy but it could be fatiguing and cause people some pain if they are especially sensitive to treble. The upper mid hump looks normal to me. It does drop off a little sooner than expected, but I think every planar driver drops off quickly in past that upper mids (past 5KHz), so dont think it would bother me too much.

That extra boost past 10KHz may make things sound more exciting and airy, but could cause occasional weird tonality too. Just my thoughts. Havent listened yet, would like to. Who wants to send me a loaner?


FYI - here is the Harman Target Curve for IEMs (the green line):

I didn't really believe in burn in when I got the vega. The vocals were recessed, and bass was too much. In my opinion, nothing special.
Felt a lot of buyers remorse, and sent it back.

 

[Spandy87]

10 days isnt enough burn-in. you need 500 hours = 500/24 = 20 days and 20 hours. /s



Yea, there's a lot more to consider like decay/waterfall csd charts, harmonic distortion, clarity, etc.

- - -

Again, I havent listend to this, but just looking at the FR chart and assuming it's Raw. It has to be otherwise that IEM is seriously messed up -- then the only thing that really may bother me is the big spike in the treble around 10-15KHz. It's probably too much a spike up. It'll create a ton of air and energy but it could be fatiguing and cause people some pain if they are especially sensitive to treble. The upper mid hump looks normal to me. It does drop off a little sooner than expected, but I think every planar driver drops off quickly in past that upper mids (past 5KHz), so dont think it would bother me too much.

That extra boost past 10KHz may make things sound more exciting and airy, but could cause occasional weird tonality too. Just my thoughts. Havent listened yet, would like to. Who wants to send me a loaner?


FYI - here is the Harman Target Curve for IEMs (the green line):

I still have it and I think I have to send it to the next person in line, but I wish it were possible for you to evaluate it as well. Maybe @RHA Team can work something out? Yeah I think it really comes down to whether or not the graph they posted is/isnt raw, and I'd also love to see someone else do measurements of it to confirm. I'm happy to be totally wrong about this IEM, but for the life of me I can't get it to sound like what some people here are claiming, and I hear it sound exactly the way the graph that was posted indicates, and lowering 3-5k fixes it wonderfully. Unfortunately I don't have the tools to do my own measurements so I'm going off of what's available. With regards to the 10-15khz, I had absolutely no problems with that range. To me the issue was solidly below the sibilance range and upper frequencies. For all the issues I had with the tuning, sibilance wasn't one of them, and it wasn't even as bright up top as the Andromeda. As I mentioned in my review, it's the "shh" sounds that are troublesome and not the "sss" sounds. Also snare drums and cymbals are super wonky, which then also corroborates the earlier message from the product lead that they deliberately bumped the region for cymbals (which also affects the sound of snares).

 

[Kitechaser]

I still have it and I think I have to send it to the next person in line, but I wish it were possible for you to evaluate it as well. Maybe @RHA Team can work something out? Yeah I think it really comes down to whether or not the graph they posted is/isnt raw, and I'd also love to see someone else do measurements of it to confirm. I'm happy to be totally wrong about this IEM, but for the life of me I can't get it to sound like what some people here are claiming, and I hear it sound exactly the way the graph that was posted does. Unfortunately I don't have the tools to do my own measurements so I'm going off of what's available. With regards to the 10-15khz, I had absolutely no problems with that range. To me the issue was solidly below the sibilance range and upper frequencies. For all the issues I had with the tuning, sibilance wasn't one of them, and it wasn't even as bright up top as the Andromeda. As I mentioned in my review, it's the "shh" sounds that are troublesome and not the "sss" sounds. Also snare drums and cymbals are super wonky, which then also corroborates the earlier message from the product lead that they deliberately bumped the region for cymbals (which also affects the sound of snares).

Talk to @RHA Team about keeping it for a few more weeks. Will be better for everybody in the community if reviewers can have significant time with them, than getting more pushed for time impressions.
+1 for you keeping them for another 3 weeks, to really play around with, to really form an objective opinion.

 

[antdroid]

Yea thats too bad. I have MiniDSP EARS at home. I didnt have it when I owned the iSine so I dont have good measurements on those. I took measurements of my ME1 planar IEMs prior to converting them to ciem and now I can't measure them anymore, at least not without doing some serious modding.

But again, everyone hears things differently. I will agree that both of you two hear what you hear. Because what makes you both happy is what matters. Someone else cant force you to enjoy something you dont want to. Keep that in mind.

Please just stop forcing opinions on everyone else. If people disagree with you, its okay. This is a subjective hobby. Machines and measurements are done with a calibrated mic and piece of machine. They arent our real ears and senses.

 

[AManAnd88Keys]

If some of you take the effort to go back several pages to some of my recent posts, I mention other measurements that could tell much more about the performance of the CL2, and RHA seconded that thought. With a frequency graph alone you know much less than you need.
Since I have heard stuff that does clearly not have an optimal frequency response but sounds awesome, my ideas about the importance of frequency response have changed tremendously. I am not alone with that opinion, Eclipse (Fujitsu Ten) for example have designed their speaker models with all their efforts focused on impulse response to have near-perfect timing, and boy did they achieve their goal. I talked personally to one of their engineers and they have a ton of science behind the design and why impulse response is a much bigger factor than frequency response. And after impulse response is distortion, especially in the mids. And even in the professional field, Eclipse are also not alone with their position.
It would be interesting to see these type of measurements of the CL2, unfortunately I don't have the means to do that but maybe RHA can release them someday.

 

[Spandy87]

If some of you take the effort to go back several pages to some of my recent posts, I mention other measurements that could tell much more about the performance of the CL2, and RHA seconded that thought. With a frequency graph alone you know much less than you need.
Since I have heard stuff that does clearly not have an optimal frequency response but sounds awesome, my ideas about the importance of frequency response have changed tremendously. I am not alone with that opinion, Eclipse (Fujitsu Ten) for example have designed their speaker models with all their efforts focused on impulse response to have near-perfect timing, and boy did they achieve their goal. I talked personally to one of their engineers and they have a ton of science behind the design and why impulse response is a much bigger factor than frequency response. And after impulse response is distortion, especially in the mids. And even in the professional field, Eclipse are also not alone with their position.
It would be interesting to see these type of measurements of the CL2, unfortunately I don't have the means to do that but maybe RHA can release them someday.

Yeah and spectral decay graphs and impulse response might help tell a more interesting story, since of course you can EQ the tuning to how you want anyway. Through all of this disagreement, the fact that overall I actually liked the IEM based on its performance in transient response, speed, and resolution seems to have been lost. I saw someone quote my review and say "he didn't like it", but that's precisely the opposite of what I said. I EQ the HD800 because it's also not quite right (although much better than the CL2 to my ears), but I still love it for its performance and technical capabilities. And by no means would I not want to use it simply because of a few peaks that don't jive with my requirements.

 

[Kitechaser]

@SciOC when your CL2 finishes burn in try this out. Acoustic guitars on the CL2.

 

[Bjrmd]

Long term break in effect?
This is a frequency response graph using the EARS platform (Pixel 2XL, apple USBC DAC now/Google DAC initially) of when I first received them and yesterday. The bass response is enhanced after time, but it could of course been positional/seal change as well. For those of you who note peaking in the mid-high region, that 4Khz spike is very consistent and is there every time I've tested. I personally cut it down about 5dB via equalization.
Blue is now
Red is initial (9/25)

 

[Duncan]

That peak doesn’t phase me, but it does make some guitars sound awesome - grab a listen to the guitar on Larkin Poe’s track “come on in my kitchen”, that guitar sounds so spot on to me, makes me wonder how I heard anything before these.

 

[Kitechaser]

All this talk about frequency graphs is convincing me more and more that they are not the end all be all.
Don't care what the bump looks like on a graph, it sounds freaking wonderful on the CL2. Guitars just wail, gives me goosebumps everytime.
Frequency graphs obviously do not tell the whole story.
Cutting down the the 4khz region by even as much as 3 db, turns the mids flat, and pushes it more into the bass. There is no longer the separation the normal tuning has in this region, reduces the 3d sound effect, and really messes with depth of soundstage.
That is how I am hearing it.
But if to your ears, that is the sound you would prefer, it is a very easy fix.

 

[SciOC]

If you want proof that FR graphs are almost meaningless, hop over to rtings.com and have a look at their headphone reviews. That's what happens when people take the measurements too seriously rather than trusting their ears.

The only thing the manufacturer FR Graph tells you is what they were trying to do with the tuning. Taking measurements of IEMs in particular is a crapshoot just because of variations in our physiology. This assumption that everyone hears the way we do is nonsense. There are a lot of factors at play. Assuming everyone will like or hate a peak around 5k is like saying that everyone loves onions because you love onions. I HATE onions. I don't know how many times I've had someone tell me "I don't even taste them at all" for me to take a bite and have them be overpowering to me. I believe our sense of hearing is actually much more complex than this, but the point stands.

Let people hear what they hear, it shouldn't impact your enjoyment of a headphone.

 

[Kitechaser]

Like others have already talked about on this thread.

 

[antdroid]

Long term break in effect?
This is a frequency response graph using the EARS platform (Pixel 2XL, apple USBC DAC now/Google DAC initially) of when I first received them and yesterday. The bass response is enhanced after time, but it could of course been positional/seal change as well. For those of you who note peaking in the mid-high region, that 4Khz spike is very consistent and is there every time I've tested. I personally cut it down about 5dB via equalization.
Blue is now
Red is initial (9/25)

Oh that is a compensated response? That is quite peaky then!

My experience with EARS on iems have been pretty consistent in the mids and treble but the bass region can vary significantly with seal, placement and depth of insertion.

Ears does do weird things at around 4-6Khz but I've only seen this before and an issue on over-ears and not a problem with iems.

Frequency response is a pretty good indicator for tonality and signature. I find it usually consistent with what I hear. It can't tell you things like decay and attack but can help me determine if I want to try something or not.

 

[antdroid]

Like others have already talked about on this thread.

His curve is IEM diffuse field compensated already. It should be flat.

The Harman curve is based on raw data from GRAS or a standard flat coupler. The curve you have shown is also the one for over-ears, but it's close enough to the iems.

 

[Bjrmd]

I am aware of some of the criticism of the Ears testing rig. But, the Shure se846 tracing I get is very similar to that of Goldenears published data.
I've also tested the Oriolus, akg n5005, and that 4k spike isn't there. I like the Rha quite a bit, but personally cut that area back about 5 db, and boost the 20-100 hz range about 5 db.
Also since there is that fall off around 7khz, you avoid the closed ear canal resonance effect.